Visit here for our full Google Professional Cloud Security Engineer exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 1
Your organization requires region-specific encryption keys for Cloud Storage, automatic key rotation every 90 days, and full audit logging of key usage. Which solution best meets these requirements?
A) Enable default Google-managed keys and configure Cloud Audit Logs
B) Use Cloud KMS CMEK with regional key rings and enable automatic rotation
C) Use CSEK with Cloud Storage and enable Logging sinks
D) Use Cloud EKM and disable key rotation
Answer: B
Explanation:
Enabling default Google-managed encryption keys and configuring Cloud Audit Logs provides a baseline level of security because Google automatically manages key rotation and ensures that data is encrypted at rest. However, this approach offers limited control and visibility into the lifecycle of cryptographic keys, which may not satisfy organizations that must meet strict regulatory or internal security requirements. While audit logs help track access and administrative actions, they do not provide the ability to customize key rotation schedules, restrict who can use keys, or enforce fine-grained cryptographic policies. Using Customer-Supplied Encryption Keys with Cloud Storage and enabling logging sinks adds more control but introduces significant operational burden. CSEK requires organizations to securely manage and store their own raw keys, which creates risks associated with key exposure, loss, or mishandling. Additionally, CSEK does not integrate well with many advanced Cloud KMS features, limiting long-term scalability and maintainability. Cloud EKM allows organizations to store encryption keys externally in their own HSM or key management system, giving maximum control. However, disabling key rotation undermines key hygiene and significantly weakens overall security posture. Regular rotation is essential for reducing exposure if a key is compromised, and EKM without rotation contradicts best practices.
The most effective solution is to use Cloud KMS with customer-managed encryption keys in regional key rings and enable automatic rotation. CMEK allows organizations to maintain control over their own encryption keys while benefiting from Google Cloud’s secure, highly available key management infrastructure. Regional key rings ensure that keys are stored within a specific geographical region, supporting data sovereignty and compliance requirements. Enabling automatic rotation reduces the risk associated with long-lived keys by routinely generating new cryptographic material without requiring manual intervention. This combination provides both strong security guarantees and operational ease. It integrates seamlessly with Google Cloud services, supports granular IAM-based controls, and ensures consistency across workloads. For most organizations seeking a balance of security, control, and maintainability, CMEK with regional key rings and automatic rotation is the optimal option.
Question 2
A financial institution must ensure neither Google administrators nor support personnel can access sensitive BigQuery datasets. What should they implement?
A) BigQuery CMEK only
B) VPC Service Controls with Cloud EKM or CSEK
C) IAM Deny policies on all Google accounts
D) BigQuery Authorized Views
Answer: B
Explanation:
VPC Service Controls (VPC-SC) combined with Cloud EKM or Customer-Supplied Encryption Keys (CSEK) is the most effective strategy for preventing Google administrators—including support engineers—from accessing data stored in BigQuery. Large financial institutions, healthcare providers, and government agencies often must protect against insider threats originating even from cloud providers. Although Google employees have strict controls and oversight, the highest sensitivity workloads demand a zero-trust stance even toward cloud operators.
VPC-SC creates a hardened, perimeter-based isolation boundary around BigQuery, preventing data exfiltration from Google’s internal network or from unauthorized contexts. Unlike typical IAM-based restrictions, VPC-SC restricts access based on network provenance. Even with correct credentials, a user or service cannot access data unless the request originates from within the protected perimeter. This boundary also applies to Google support personnel operating from Google-controlled environments, making it the strongest mechanism for insider risk mitigation.
However, VPC-SC alone does not fully solve the problem because Google still technically operates the underlying infrastructure—including encryption keys for Google-managed encryption. Therefore, Cloud EKM or CSEK becomes essential. With Cloud EKM, encryption keys stay outside Google’s infrastructure in an external HSM that your organization controls. As a result, Google cannot decrypt your data unless you explicitly allow access through your external key system. If a support case arises, you retain full authority to grant or deny temporary key access. CSEK works similarly by requiring customer-provided raw keys, though EKM is the more modern and operationally secure option.
Other options fall short. CMEK alone (A) prevents uncontrolled rotation but not Google access. IAM Deny policies (C) do not block internal Google systems. Authorized Views (D) restrict analyst access but offer zero protection against cloud provider access. Therefore, only option B provides the required defense-in-depth strategy.
Question 3
You must enforce that all newly created Cloud Storage buckets use CMEK. Developers frequently create buckets and must be prevented from using default encryption. What should you apply?
A) Cloud Function to scan buckets
B) Bucket Policy Only
C) Organization Policy: requireCmekForStorage
D) Cloud Run webhook to validate buckets
Answer: C
Explanation:
A Cloud Function that scans buckets can help identify misconfigurations or unencrypted objects, but this approach is reactive and depends on periodic execution. It cannot prevent the creation of unencrypted buckets or objects in the first place, and it introduces operational overhead because someone must maintain the function, handle errors, and ensure it runs consistently. It also cannot enforce strict organizational controls across multiple projects, making it unreliable for environments that require guaranteed adherence to security standards. Bucket Policy Only improves access control by enforcing uniform bucket-level IAM and preventing the use of object-level ACLs, but it does not enforce encryption requirements. While it simplifies permission management and reduces inconsistent ACL usage, it still allows the creation of buckets that rely on Google-managed encryption keys rather than customer-managed ones. A Cloud Run webhook designed to validate buckets before they are created can provide custom verification logic, but it requires building and maintaining an entire validation infrastructure that intercepts API calls. This approach is complex, fragile, and susceptible to bypasses unless every workflow, interface, and automation respects the webhook. It also risks failing open if there are outages, and it does not integrate natively with Google Cloud’s enforcement mechanisms.
An Organization Policy that enables the requireCmekForStorage constraint provides a strong and enforceable control across the entire organization or selected folders and projects. This policy ensures that all newly created Cloud Storage buckets must use customer-managed encryption keys and prevents the creation of buckets that rely solely on default Google-managed keys. Because it operates at the organization level, it cannot be bypassed by project owners, API calls, or automated pipelines. It enforces compliance automatically and consistently, eliminating the need for periodic scans or manual oversight. This provides a critical layer of protection for organizations with regulatory, compliance, or internal security requirements that mandate the use of customer-managed keys for sensitive datA) By shifting enforcement to the platform and relying on built-in capabilities rather than scripts or workarounds, the Organization Policy offers the most reliable, scalable, and comprehensive solution for ensuring encryption standards are met.
Question 4
A Compute Engine VM must only call specific Google APIs using identity-based controls, with no dependence on network firewalls. What should you configure?
A) Firewall rules blocking all except Google APIs
B) Service Account IAM roles, restricted OAuth scopes, and VPC-SC
C) VPC-SC alone
D) Cloud NAT restrictions
Answer: B
Explanation:
Firewall rules blocking all traffic except Google APIs can help restrict outbound connections and reduce exposure to unapproved external services, but they do not provide identity-aware controls or prevent misuse of overly privileged service accounts. This approach focuses only on network-level restrictions and cannot stop a workload with excessive permissions from accessing sensitive Google Cloud resources or performing unintended actions. It also lacks the ability to enforce fine-grained permission boundaries, making it insufficient on its own for protecting high-risk or sensitive workloads. Relying on a VPC-SC perimeter alone can reduce the risk of data exfiltration by creating service boundaries around Google Cloud resources, but VPC-SC does not manage IAM permissions, OAuth scopes, or internal workload identities. A service perimeter still allows overly privileged service accounts to cause damage within the perimeter, and by itself it does not control which API methods workloads can invoke. Cloud NAT restrictions limit outbound internet traffic from workloads that do not have public IPs, but they are focused entirely on egress behavior. They cannot enforce identity-based access rules, least-privilege permissions, or control how workloads interact with Google APIs. Cloud NAT alone is therefore an incomplete solution that must be paired with identity and data-control mechanisms.
A combination of service account IAM roles, restricted OAuth scopes, and VPC-SC provides a far more complete and layered security model. Service account IAM roles ensure workloads receive only the minimum permissions needed to perform their functions, reducing the blast radius of a compromised workloaD) Restricted OAuth scopes limit which Google Cloud API methods the workload can call, adding another layer of protection that prevents misuse of credentials even if IAM permissions are configured broadly. When paired with VPC-SC, workloads are additionally protected by service perimeters that restrict which services and resources they can reach, preventing data from being exfiltrated outside approved boundaries. Together, these controls align identity, permissions, API-level access, and perimeter-level protection to create a comprehensive defense-in-depth strategy. For securely controlling how workloads access Google APIs and ensuring the principle of least privilege, this combined approach is the most effective.
Question 5
Your internal services require certificate lifecycle automation for HTTPS and mTLS across multiple environments. Which Google Cloud components should you use?
A) Let’s Encrypt and Cloud Run domain mapping
B) SSL policies on load balancers
C) Certificate Authority Service and Certificate Manager
D) Self-managed certificates stored in Secret Manager
Answer: C
Explanation:
Let’s Encrypt and Cloud Run domain mapping provide an easy way to issue and manage certificates for public endpoints, but they are limited in scope and do not offer the enterprise-level control, lifecycle management, or private certificate issuance required for complex environments. SSL policies on load balancers help enforce modern TLS versions and cipher suites to strengthen security for inbound traffic, yet they do not manage certificate issuance or automate renewals across multiple services. Self-managed certificates stored in Secret Manager offer more control than basic integrations, but they introduce operational overhead because teams must manually handle certificate rotation, validate expiration timelines, and ensure that certificates are deployed correctly across all workloads. This increases the risk of outages due to expired certificates or misconfigurations. Certificate Authority Service combined with Certificate Manager provides a complete, scalable, and automated solution for both public and private certificate issuance. Certificate Authority Service enables organizations to operate their own private PKI with granular policy enforcement, while Certificate Manager automates deployment, renewal, and lifecycle operations across Google Cloud services. This combination supports hybrid architectures, integrates with load balancers and service meshes, and centralizes certificate governance for improved compliance and security. It eliminates the burden of manual certificate handling and ensures consistent, reliable encryption for internal and external communication. For these reasons, it is the most comprehensive and enterprise-ready option among those listeD)
Question 6
Developers currently have primitive roles such as Editor. You must transition to least privilege without breaking workloads. What should you use?
A) Manually remove roles
B) IAM Recommender and Organization Policy banning primitive roles
C) Delete all IAM bindings and recreate from scratch
D) VPC-SC perimeters
Answer: B
Explanation:
Manually removing roles can help clean up overly permissive access, but it is a slow and error-prone process, especially in large organizations where many users, service accounts, and projects exist. It also relies heavily on human judgment, which increases the likelihood of accidental privilege removal or missed risky permissions. Deleting all IAM bindings and recreating them from scratch is even more disruptive because it can break running workloads, stop automation, and interrupt business operations. This approach does not guarantee that the newly created bindings will follow best practices unless strict controls are put in place, making it impractical for real-world environments. VPC-SC perimeters strengthen data exfiltration protection by restricting how resources interact across defined service boundaries, but they do not address issues related to overly broad IAM roles or excessive privileges within the environment. IAM Recommender combined with Organization Policies that ban primitive roles provides a far more effective and systematic solution. IAM Recommender analyzes actual usage patterns and suggests removing permissions that users or service accounts no longer need, helping teams move toward least-privilege access without guesswork. Organization Policies that block the assignment of primitive roles such as Owner, Editor, and Viewer prevent future misuse and ensure consistency across all projects. By combining intelligent recommendations with enforced governance, this option offers a scalable, automated, and preventive model for maintaining a secure IAM posture.
Question 7
All VMs must block Internet egress except for traffic destined to Google APIs, and all external traffic must pass through a proxy. What design ensures compliance?
A) Public IPs on all VMs and firewall allowlists
B) Private Google Access, deny-all egress firewall rules, and Cloud NAT only for proxy
C) VPC-SC alone
D) Route Google APIs through on-premises VPN
Answer: B
Explanation:
Public IPs on all virtual machines combined with firewall allowlists create a broad attack surface because each VM becomes reachable from the internet, even if access is restricted by IP ranges. This approach increases exposure to scanning, brute-force attempts, and misconfigurations, and it does not provide strong control over outbound traffic or prevent data from leaving the environment through allowed but unintended destinations. Using only a VPC-SC perimeter strengthens data exfiltration protection for specific Google Cloud services, but it does not control direct egress from virtual machines, nor does it restrict traffic that leaves the network through external IPs. VPC-SC is effective as part of a layered defense strategy, yet by itself it cannot enforce complete control over how workloads reach the internet or access Google APIs. Routing Google API traffic through an on-premises VPN introduces unnecessary complexity, latency, and dependency on physical infrastructure, and it does not inherently restrict outbound access from cloud workloads. Private Google Access combined with deny-all egress firewall rules and Cloud NAT used only for proxy traffic provides a more comprehensive and secure foundation. Private Google Access ensures that workloads without public IPs can still reach Google APIs securely over internal routes. Deny-all egress firewall rules prevent workloads from initiating outbound connections unless explicitly allowed, reducing the risk of accidental data leakage or malicious exfiltration. Cloud NAT configured only for approved proxy traffic allows controlled and monitored access to required external resources without exposing individual virtual machines to the public internet. This combination effectively eliminates public IP exposure, enforces strict outbound control, and ensures that communication with Google services remains secure and contained within private networking paths.
Question 8
HIPAA requirements mandate logging of every BigQuery access event with long-term retention. What should you configure?
A) Admin Activity Logs only
B) BigQuery Omni Logs
C) BigQuery Data Access Logs exported to Cloud Storage or BigQuery
D) Cloud Monitoring Metrics only
Answer: C
Explanation:
Admin Activity Logs only capture administrative actions such as creating resources, modifying configurations, or changing permissions. While they are essential for auditing who made changes to the environment, they do not record detailed information about data reads or data queries, which is necessary when investigating unauthorized access or potential misuse of sensitive datasets. BigQuery Omni Logs apply specifically to BigQuery Omni workloads that run across multiple clouds, so they are relevant only in hybrid or multi-cloud deployments. They do not provide complete visibility into standard BigQuery usage within Google Cloud and therefore cannot serve as the primary source for auditing data access. Cloud Monitoring Metrics only track performance indicators such as query duration, resource usage, and cost-related metrics. These metrics provide operational insights but do not show which user accessed which table or what type of query they executeD) BigQuery Data Access Logs exported to Cloud Storage or BigQuery offer the most comprehensive and scalable method for auditing data access activity. These logs capture detailed information about query execution, including which user or service account ran the query, which tables were accessed, what resources were read, and whether sensitive data was involveD) Exporting these logs allows long-term retention, advanced analysis, correlation with other data sources, and integration with security monitoring tools. This makes them essential for compliance, forensic investigations, and continuous monitoring of data access behavior. For these reasons, exporting BigQuery Data Access Logs is the most effective option for full visibility into how data is being accesseD)
Question 9
Your microservices run on Cloud Run, GKE, and Compute Engine. They must authenticate requests using a lightweight identity mechanism with low latency. Which method is best?
A) API keys
B) OAuth 2.0 user tokens
C) IAM service account OIDC identity tokens
D) Mutual TLS only
Answer: C
Explanation:
API keys provide a simple way for applications to authenticate to services, but they are static, easily exposed, and lack strong identity binding. They do not include information about who or what is making the request, which makes them unsuitable for secure, large-scale service-to-service communication. OAuth 2.0 user tokens are designed for end-user authorization flows and depend on interactive user consent, making them inappropriate for backend workloads or automated systems that require non-interactive authentication. Mutual TLS offers strong encryption and helps verify the identity of communicating parties at the transport layer, but by itself it does not provide granular IAM-based authorization or the ability to enforce fine-grained permissions tied to specific service accounts. IAM service account OIDC identity tokens offer a secure and cloud-native way for workloads to authenticate to Google Cloud services. These tokens are short-lived, automatically issued, and strongly bound to an IAM service account identity, enabling precise access control based on least privilege. They integrate with Google’s IAM system, allowing policies to define exactly what a workload can access using its identity, while avoiding the risks associated with storing long-lived credentials. This approach supports secure, scalable, and auditable authentication between services, making it far more reliable and appropriate than static keys, user tokens, or mTLS alone.
Question 10
To ensure only trusted and scanned container images are deployed, what should you configure on GKE?
A) Shielded Nodes
B) Network Policies
C) Binary Authorization with attestors
D) Cloud Logging filters
Answer: C
Explanation:
Shielded Nodes help protect Kubernetes nodes from tampering by using secure boot and integrity monitoring, but they do not control which container images are allowed to run in a cluster. Their focus is on safeguarding the underlying node rather than enforcing supply chain integrity. Network Policies restrict how pods communicate with one another by defining allowed ingress and egress traffic, improving the security of cluster networking. However, they do not validate the origin or trustworthiness of container images before deployment. Cloud Logging filters assist teams in searching, analyzing, and alerting on specific log patterns, which is useful for monitoring but does not provide a preventive control to stop unverified or untrusted images from running in the first place. Binary Authorization with attestors provides a strong mechanism to ensure that only vetted and approved container images are deployed into the environment. Attestors act as trusted validators that sign images after they pass required checks, such as vulnerability scanning, compliance verification, or build pipeline review. During deployment, the system verifies that the image has the required signatures before allowing it to run. This prevents the execution of unknown, tampered, or unauthorized containers and enforces a secure software supply chain. Because it ensures integrity and trustworthiness at the deployment stage, Binary Authorization with attestors is the strongest and most appropriate option among those listeD)
Question 11
You need automated DLP scanning for Cloud Storage uploads and auto-quarantine of sensitive objects. What architecture should you use?
A) Manual scans using Cloud Console
B) Cloud DLP + Pub/Sub notifications + Cloud Functions
C) Cloud Monitoring alerts only
D) VPC-SC service perimeter
Answer: B
Explanation:
Manual scans using the Cloud Console require an operator to periodically review data sources, run scans, and look for sensitive information, which is inefficient and prone to human error. This approach lacks automation, does not scale well, and cannot provide timely detection when new sensitive data appears. Cloud Monitoring alerts are valuable for identifying performance issues, resource anomalies, or metric thresholds being exceeded, but they are not designed to inspect data content or detect the presence of sensitive information such as personal identifiers, financial records, or confidential text. A VPC-SC service perimeter helps prevent data exfiltration by restricting access to Google Cloud services and enforcing boundaries around sensitive resources, yet it does not analyze the data itself or notify teams when sensitive information is stored in unexpected locations. Cloud DLP combined with Pub/Sub notifications and Cloud Functions offers a fully automated and scalable solution for detecting and responding to sensitive data appearing in cloud storage or other data sources. Cloud DLP can continuously scan for patterns such as credit card numbers, personal details, and other sensitive elements. When new findings occur, Pub/Sub can publish real-time notifications, which trigger Cloud Functions to perform follow-up actions such as tagging the file, moving it to a secure bucket, alerting the security team, or applying encryption policies. This automated pipeline ensures fast detection, consistent handling, and reduced human oversight, making it the most effective option for continuously monitoring sensitive datA)
Question 12
Your SOC needs centralized threat signals for IAM anomalies, malware, misconfigurations, and suspicious networking behavior. What should you enable?
A) Cloud Monitoring
B) Security Command Center Premium with Event Threat Detection
C) BigQuery scheduled queries
D) Firewall Rules Logging
Answer: B
Explanation:
Cloud Monitoring focuses on collecting metrics, tracking uptime, and identifying performance-related issues across cloud infrastructure and applications. While it is essential for operational insight, it does not specialize in detecting sophisticated security threats or analyzing patterns that indicate malicious activity. BigQuery scheduled queries are useful for automating data analysis and reporting, but they are not designed to detect security anomalies, correlate threat indicators, or alert on suspicious behavior in real time. Firewall Rules Logging helps capture information about network traffic allowed or denied by firewall policies, providing valuable insight for auditing and troubleshooting, but it does not offer automated threat intelligence, behavioral analysis, or built-in detection of advanced attacks. Security Command Center Premium with Event Threat Detection provides a comprehensive, cloud-native security monitoring solution that identifies malware, suspicious API activity, anomalous authentication attempts, potential data exfiltration, and other high-risk behaviors. It uses continuously updated threat intelligence, machine learning, and advanced rule-based detection to monitor an organization’s entire Google Cloud environment. This enables rapid identification of attacks such as compromised service accounts, unauthorized access, privilege escalation, or lateral movement. The service centralizes findings, allows security teams to prioritize threats, and integrates with remediation workflows. Because it provides broad coverage, real-time detection, and deep visibility into security incidents across the cloud environment, it is the most effective and comprehensive option among those listeD)
Question 13
You must prevent developers from creating weak service account governance and ensure service accounts cannot receive overly broad roles. What should you configure?
A) ACLs on individual services
B) IAM Conditions
C) Organization Policies restricting service account creation and primitive role binding
D) Cloud VPN restrictions
Answer: C
Explanation:
ACLs on individual services provide a basic way to control access by defining which users or systems can interact with specific resources, but managing them separately for each service quickly becomes complex and difficult to maintain in large cloud environments. They also lack centralized governance, making it easier for inconsistencies and misconfigurations to occur. IAM Conditions offer contextual access control by evaluating attributes such as device security, request time, or network location, which strengthens security at the resource level. However, IAM Conditions do not directly prevent the creation of overly permissive roles or unauthorized service accounts, which are common sources of privilege escalation. Cloud VPN restrictions help control access between on-premises networks and cloud environments by limiting which IP ranges can connect, but VPN settings do not govern identity and access management and cannot prevent internal over-permissioning or risky role assignments. Organization Policies that restrict service account creation and the use of primitive roles provide a far more effective control because they enforce security at the highest hierarchy level. These policies prevent users from creating unnecessary or unapproved service accounts and block the assignment of broad roles such as Owner, Editor, or Viewer, which helps maintain least-privilege access across the organization. By applying these restrictions centrally, organizations reduce the risk of privilege abuse, accidental exposure, and uncontrolled credential proliferation, making this option the strongest and most comprehensive governance mechanism available.
Question 14
A regulated organization needs Compute Engine disks encrypted with keys stored outside Google Cloud for instant revocation. Which solution supports this?
A) CMEK only
B) Cloud EKM with external HSM
C) Secret Manager encryption
D) File-level Linux encryption
Answer: B
Explanation:
CMEK only provides customer-managed encryption keys that reside within Google Cloud’s native Key Management Service, giving organizations more control over key rotation and access policies compared to Google-managed keys. However, the keys still remain inside Google Cloud’s infrastructure, meaning they do not meet requirements for situations where organizations must maintain full physical control of cryptographic material. Secret Manager encryption protects secrets such as API keys and passwords stored within the service, but it relies on Google’s internal encryption mechanisms unless combined with CMEK, and it is not intended for scenarios demanding externally hosted or independently verifiable key custody. File-level Linux encryption protects data on individual virtual machine disks or filesystems, but it operates only at the OS level, lacks centralized management, and does not provide the ability to enforce organization-wide cryptographic governance across all cloud services. Cloud External Key Manager with an external Hardware Security Module offers the strongest control because it allows organizations to keep their encryption keys entirely outside Google ClouD) This ensures that Google cannot access or decrypt customer data without authorization from the external key system, which satisfies strict regulatory, sovereignty, or compliance requirements. With Cloud EKM, decryption requests require approval from the externally hosted HSM, enabling organizations to enforce access control policies independently from Google Cloud’s internal systems. For environments needing maximum assurance, external key custody, and the highest level of control over cryptographic operations, Cloud EKM with an external HSM is the most suitable option among those listeD)
Question 15
Your GKE workloads must map Kubernetes service accounts to Google service accounts without storing keys. What should you use?
A) Static JSON keys
B) Workload Identity
C) SSH keys
D) OAuth 2.0 user tokens
Answer: B
Explanation:
Static JSON keys rely on long-lived credentials stored on disk, which makes them vulnerable to theft, accidental exposure, and misuse, especially in automated or containerized environments where files may be copied or logged unintentionally. SSH keys are useful for accessing virtual machines but are not appropriate for authenticating workloads to cloud services because they lack automated rotation, centralized management, and fine-grained access control. OAuth 2.0 user tokens are designed for end-user authorization rather than workload authentication, meaning they depend on user context, have limited lifespans tied to interactive sessions, and are not suited for scalable, non-interactive service communication. Workload Identity, on the other hand, provides a secure and automated way for applications running on Google Cloud to obtain short-lived, automatically rotated credentials without storing secrets. It binds Kubernetes service accounts or VM identities to IAM service accounts, ensuring workloads authenticate using their assigned identity rather than static credentials. This reduces the risk of credential leakage, simplifies access management, and ensures that permissions follow the principles of least privilege and centralized policy enforcement. Because it eliminates the use of long-lived secrets and provides a cloud-native, secure, and maintainable authentication model, Workload Identity is the strongest and most appropriate option among the choices.
Question 16
Your security team requires encrypted and authenticated service-to-service communication inside GKE using zero-trust principles. What should you implement?
A) VPC-SC perimeter
B) Anthos Service Mesh (ASM) with mTLS
C) Cloud Armor
D) SSL load balancer
Answer: B
Explanation:
A VPC-SC perimeter helps protect data by restricting access to Google Cloud services and preventing data exfiltration across defined service boundaries, but it does not provide fine-grained workload-to-workload authentication or encryption within a cluster. Cloud Armor offers protection against distributed denial-of-service attacks, enforces web application firewall policies, and filters incoming traffic based on rules, but it primarily focuses on external threats rather than securing internal service communication. An SSL load balancer ensures encrypted traffic between clients and backend services, improving security for external connections, yet it does not provide identity-based authentication or end-to-end encryption between microservices inside an application environment. Anthos Service Mesh with mutual TLS, however, provides strong security at the service-to-service level by automatically enabling encrypted communication, authenticating workloads with cryptographic identities, and enforcing consistent security policies across distributed microservices. It offers granular traffic control, telemetry, and policy enforcement, making it well suited for securing modern cloud-native architectures where multiple services must interact privately and securely. By establishing authenticated and encrypted channels between all workloads, Anthos Service Mesh significantly reduces the risk of impersonation, tampering, and unencrypted internal traffiC) For these reasons, it is the most effective choice among the listed options for securing microservice communication.
Question 17
Your compliance officer mandates phishing-resistant authentication and MFA for access to the Google Cloud Console. What should you enforce?
A) SMS-based 2FA
B) Password-only logins
C) Security Keys (FIDO2) with Context-Aware Access
D) OAuth 2.0 tokens
Answer: C
Explanation:
SMS-based 2FA adds an extra step during authentication by sending a verification code to a user’s mobile device, but it is vulnerable to SIM swapping, phishing, and interception attacks, making it insufficient for securing high-risk environments. Password-only logins offer the weakest level of protection because passwords can be guessed, stolen, reused across services, or compromised through brute force attacks, which makes them unreliable as a standalone method in modern security architectures. OAuth 2.0 tokens support delegated authorization and help control which applications can act on a user’s behalf, but these tokens alone do not provide strong authentication assurance and can be misused if intercepted or improperly storeD) Security Keys based on the FIDO2 standard, combined with Context-Aware Access, form a far more secure and robust solution by requiring users to physically possess a cryptographic hardware key while also ensuring that access is granted only under approved conditions such as device health, location, IP range, or security status. This combination offers protection against phishing, replay attacks, credential theft, and unauthorized access attempts, since authentication cannot proceed without the hardware key and contextual checks. As a result, it provides the highest level of identity assurance and access control among the listed options, making it the most effective method for securing sensitive accounts and workloads.
Question 18
A company must detect suspicious large-scale data download activity from BigQuery. What should they use?
A) Cloud Monitoring
B) Security Command Center BigQuery Data Exfiltration Detection
C) Firewall rules
D) Manual audits
Answer: B
Explanation:
Cloud Monitoring is designed to track the performance, availability, and health of cloud resources by collecting metrics, creating dashboards, and generating alerts. While it is essential for operational visibility, it does not specialize in detecting sophisticated security threats such as abnormal data movement or unauthorized access to sensitive information. Firewall rules provide network-level controls that restrict or allow traffic based on IP ranges, ports, or protocols, but they cannot detect or analyze complex behavioral patterns like data exfiltration attempts occurring within legitimate traffic flows or through authorized services. Manual audits can help organizations review configurations, analyze logs, and verify compliance, but they are time consuming, prone to oversight, and ineffective for real-time detection of emerging threats, especially in large or dynamic environments. Security Command Center BigQuery Data Exfiltration Detection, however, is specifically built to identify suspicious queries and access patterns that may indicate attempts to move or extract sensitive information from BigQuery datasets. It uses machine learning and contextual signals to detect unusual read volumes, unexpected query behavior, or accesses from anomalous locations, providing timely alerts that help security teams intervene before data loss occurs. This makes it the only option among the choices capable of offering automated, intelligent, and continuous monitoring specifically targeted at preventing BigQuery data exfiltration.
Question 19
Identity tokens issued to Cloud Run services must be usable only inside specific environments, even if stolen. What should you configure?
A) OAuth scopes only
B) Audience restrictions, IAM Conditions, and VPC-SC
C) Firewall allowlists
D) SSL certificates
Answer: B
Explanation:
OAuth scopes only provide a basic method of defining what an application can access on behalf of a user, but they lack the granular, contextual, and resource-level controls needed for securing complex cloud environments. Firewall allowlists help control network traffic by allowing connections only from specified IP ranges, yet they cannot enforce identity-based or context-aware restrictions and do not address risks related to unauthorized service-to-service communication. SSL certificates ensure encrypted communication between clients and servers, protecting data in transit, but they do not govern access policies, identity constraints, or the internal interactions between cloud services. Audience restrictions, IAM Conditions, and VPC Service Controls together offer a comprehensive and layered security approach: audience restrictions ensure tokens are used only by the intended service, preventing token forwarding or misuse; IAM Conditions allow contextual access control based on attributes such as device security, time, or network location; and VPC Service Controls provide strong data exfiltration protection by creating service perimeters around sensitive resources. These combined mechanisms deliver a more advanced and defense-in-depth security model that goes far beyond simple scopes, network rules, or encryption requirements, making them the most complete and effective option for enhancing secure service-to-service communication in cloud environments.
Question 20
Your SOC wants centralized management of vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, IAM risks, and encryption posture across all projects. What Google Cloud service fits?
A) Cloud Logging
B) Cloud Monitoring
C) Security Command Center Premium
D) Artifact Registry
Answer: C
Explanation:
Cloud Logging is a managed service that gathers, stores, and analyzes logs from applications and infrastructure to improve troubleshooting and operational insight, while Cloud Monitoring focuses on tracking system performance, uptime, and health through metrics, dashboards, and alerts to support reliability rather than deep security analysis. Artifact Registry provides secure storage and management for build artifacts such as container images and packages, supporting software supply chain needs but not offering enterprise-level security posture or threat management. In contrast, Security Command Center Premium is a comprehensive cloud security and risk management platform that delivers advanced threat detection, vulnerability identification, misconfiguration monitoring, data protection analysis, and organization-wide security posture visibility, making it the only option in this list designed to provide full cloud security oversight and threat intelligence.
